Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
as a Libertarian, Progressive Centerist I'll respond to these statements characterizing The Left.....
"There really isn't any question about the new jobs being created by the growth of clean renewable energy."
I would agree we need renewable energy. Not because of global warming, but because we need to get off our addiction to oil from countries that don't like us...And, we need more US jobs in nuclear and clean coal...It's the practical thing to do...
With Bush in power we had no choice about arguing with them about the reality of AGW. We had to argue about creationism....
I am a creationist but also an agnostic - I don't know how things were created, but I am too logical to believe that species somehow evolved from algae...
...abstinence...
I am pro-life since I think logically - this is a family discussion board, so we'll just say that something is still alive even before it's born. Those on the left don't think logically since they are narcissistic. They can't conceptualize that something might be alive even before it is borne. The birth of a human being is beautiful from day 1 to the hospital. Abortion is murder, but overturning roe. vs. wade is impractical.
This is what I love about the lunatic fringe/climate change denial crowd: They can so easily boil science down to pure politics.
And, with climate change very real, and presently getting worse as we humans continue to spew filth into the ozone and atmosphere, it seems that it is upsetting to the fringer's that any monies for RESEARCH on how to STOP it is being spent
Not a peep, however, was heard while billions went missing, unaccounted for, in Iraq.
Of course, if we were really serious about spending money on climate change, it might be a good example to follow the Netherlands example and invest in the infrastructure that might delay the inevitable effects it will have on coastal cities.
It's astounding. It really is. On the one hand, the "climate change is a hoax" nonsense is merely a classic denial response in the face of a paradigm shift. There has always been, historically, a certain segment of the population that responds in this way. There are some folks who just cannot deal. On the other hand, in this particular case, their resistance and denial--digging in their heels, being dragged kicking-and-screaming into reality, blubbering paranoia--will slow down the process of shifting to alternative energies. And since they don't have a CLUE how ecology really functions, and what the real threats are--they just pick-and-choose from their Google assortment of global-warming-deniers--they have no idea how truly tragic the situation is becoming. Thus, the mockery ("The sky is falling--oh my") or political, obsessive paranoia ("Al Gore is evil, therefore global warming is a lie"; or--my personal favorite--"the liberals are just fear-baiting so that they can take over the world" or some variation thereof). No wonder people in other countries think Americans are so idiotic.
About a year before Katrina hit, National Geographic ran a "what if" article on what would happen if a massive hurricane hit New Orleans. It's chilling to read now. Part of the article talked about how the Dutch had offered to help us fortify the coastline, but the Bush administration refused their expertise, said it wasn't needed. Yep. We're king of the world--don't need no help from no foreigners, no sirree. And Nature is nothing more nor less than a resource put here--by our Christian God--for us to exploit as we like. So what if we are destroying our own environment--you know, the one we rely on for our very existence--Nature wouldn't DARE die on us. And even if it does--hey, it's God's plan! . . . .
Listening to these people is like finding one's self transported back to the 17th century: How DARE Galileo suggest that the earth doesn't revolve around US? Hang him! Burn him at the stake! Evil! Liar!
Roger Revelle was the grandfather of global warming. His work had laid the foundation for the UN IPCC, provided the anti-fossil fuel ammunition to the environmental movement and sent a young student attending his lectures Al Gore on his road to his books.
However Roger Revell, a scientist wanted to continue his studies during his semi-retirement at USCD.
There he had time to rethink Carbon Dioxide and the greenhouse effect. The man who had inspired Al Gore and given the UN the basic research it needed to launch its Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change was having second thoughts.
In 1988 he wrote two cautionary letters to members of Congress. He wrote, "My own personal belief is that we should wait another 10 or 20 years to really be convinced that the greenhouse effect is going to be important for human beings, in both positive and negative ways." He added, "…we should be careful not to arouse too much alarm until the rate and amount of warming becomes clearer."
And in 1991 Revelle teamed up with Chauncey Starr, founding director of the Electric Power Research Institute and Fred Singer, the first director of the U.S. Weather Satellite Service, to write an article for Cosmos magazine. They urged more research and begged scientists and governments not to move too fast to curb greenhouse CO2 emissions because the true impact of carbon dioxide was not at all certain and curbing the use of fossil fuels could have a huge negative impact on the economy and jobs and our standard of living.
Dr. Singer has gone on record stating that Revelle was considerably more certain than he was at Harvard that carbon dioxide was not a problem.
Roger Revelle died of a heart attack three months after the Cosmos story was printed. If only Revelle were still alive. He might be able to stop this scientific silliness and end the global warming scam.
as a Libertarian, Progressive Centerist I'll respond to these statements characterizing The Left.....
"There really isn't any question about the new jobs being created by the growth of clean renewable energy."
I would agree we need renewable energy. Not because of global warming, but because we need to get off our addiction to oil from countries that don't like us...And, we need more US jobs in nuclear and clean coal...It's the practical thing to do...
With Bush in power we had no choice about arguing with them about the reality of AGW. We had to argue about creationism....
I am a creationist but also an agnostic - I don't know how things were created, but I am too logical to believe that species somehow evolved from algae...
...abstinence...
I am pro-life since I think logically - this is a family discussion board, so we'll just say that something is still alive even before it's born. Those on the left don't think logically since they are narcissistic. They can't conceptualize that something might be alive even before it is borne. The birth of a human being is beautiful from day 1 to the hospital. Abortion is murder, but overturning roe. vs. wade is impractical.
1)
If the idea that a disembodied deity created the world, and that his son rose from the dead after three days, is logical--then life evolving from small-cell organisms is more than logical.
2)
Do you eat meat? If you do, then you support horrific brutality against animals on factory farms. The birth of an animal is beautiful, too. So save us the pontificating about the sanctity of life. And save your breath about the hierarchy of being and the hierarchy of the value of life, because it's bullsh*t.
Roger Revelle was the grandfather of global warming. His work had laid the foundation for the UN IPCC, provided the anti-fossil fuel ammunition to the environmental movement and sent a young student attending his lectures Al Gore on his road to his books.
However Roger Revell, a scientist wanted to continue his studies during his semi-retirement at USCD.
There he had time to rethink Carbon Dioxide and the greenhouse effect. The man who had inspired Al Gore and given the UN the basic research it needed to launch its Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change was having second thoughts.
In 1988 he wrote two cautionary letters to members of Congress. He wrote, "My own personal belief is that we should wait another 10 or 20 years to really be convinced that the greenhouse effect is going to be important for human beings, in both positive and negative ways." He added, "…we should be careful not to arouse too much alarm until the rate and amount of warming becomes clearer."
And in 1991 Revelle teamed up with Chauncey Starr, founding director of the Electric Power Research Institute and Fred Singer, the first director of the U.S. Weather Satellite Service, to write an article for Cosmos magazine. They urged more research and begged scientists and governments not to move too fast to curb greenhouse CO2 emissions because the true impact of carbon dioxide was not at all certain and curbing the use of fossil fuels could have a huge negative impact on the economy and jobs and our standard of living.
Dr. Singer has gone on record stating that Revelle was considerably more certain than he was at Harvard that carbon dioxide was not a problem.
Roger Revelle died of a heart attack three months after the Cosmos story was printed. If only Revelle were still alive. He might be able to stop this scientific silliness and end the global warming scam.
There will always be a marginal segment of the scientific community who disputes global warming. They are wrong. They are dead wrong.
You can cherry-pick whomever you choose to confirm and perpetuate your willful blindness. The fact is: the VAST majority of scientists have NO DOUBT that global warming exists. No REPUTABLE scientist disputes it. If you really cared about the truth of the matter, you would educate yourself more thoroughly. But, like most people of your uninformed opinion, you'd rather just shoot from the hip, frantically gather together whatever nutjob "scientific" viewpoints you can to shore up your already-decided point of view on the matter. In your paranoid world, a few scraggling scientists--simply because they affirm your own biases--hold authority over and beyond that of all modern world governments and the scientists who inform them. Sad.
P.S. And Revelle died in 1991--when Global Warming was still a new concept and all the data wasn't yet in. Given the evidence we now have, there's NO WAY he would refute it today.
31,000 "Scientists" (Some Dead) Refute Global Warming
In keeping with the amount of virtual ink this item deserves, we're going to try and keep this short. The Oregon Institute of Science and Medicine held a press conference this morning to announce that 31,000 "scientists" have signed a petition rejecting claims of human-caused global warming.
ps Moving Forward for your info...Its been freezing here in Boston the past month and quite a bit of snow...but I guess I must be hallucinating its really florida weather out there...please send me some sun tan lotion...
Interesting info on the stimulus package and climatologists:
"President Barack Obama's trillion dollar stimulus plan, has morphed into an appropriations bill devoid of debate. The process forgoes any pretense of targeting unemployed people and resources. For instance, the bill reads 'Provided further, that not less than $140,000,000 shall be available for climate data modeling.' This raises the question of how many unemployed climate modelers are out there pounding the pavement. When presented with that question, last Friday, Pat Michaels, former president of the American Association of State Climatologists stated 'I don't know one unemployed modeler.'
"Whether or not another $140,000,000 for climate data modeling is a good idea, it is hard to see an immediate, economy-stimulating impact from this item. This establishes that if you're a climate modeler, you get money from the federal government. This government is the Obama government. They want to propagate this manmade global warming hoax. You take money from them for your climate computer models, when you don't even need it? What, do I wonder, are your results going to show? Exactly what Obama wants.
This is why I'm very skeptical of all these supposely expert climatologists about Global warming.....
Great job on copying somebody else's blog, with no commentary on your own. And of course we can't ask you any questions on it because you wouldn't have a clue since these are not your words. Anyway...
The US Government has employed climatologists for at least 50 years, well before any notion of global warming existed. Climate modeling was one of first applications for the development of supercomputers and is intrinsic to the science of weather forecasting. Most of the government climatologists work for branches of the military. Why? Because weather information is an essential part of military strategy. Not just short-range forecasts, but understanding probabilities of wind and cloud cover for a specific regions in a moments notice are an important edge in battle.
And, yeah. They're probably studying global warming as well. It's moronic to suggest climatologists have any particular bias as to the cause of it. They're scientists. Blame the idiots like Al Gore for sensationalizing results with their own spins. I'd rather have scientists out there gathering more data than not.
I particularly like the non-sequitor remark by a state (as if they matter) climatologist about not knowing of any out of work climate modelers. LOL! How many climate modelers do you personally know? Tell ya what, go out and get a few advanced degrees in earth sciences and statistics, and you too can get a government job as a climate modeler and make maybe $100K tops, while anybody else with those credentials working in the private sector would be making double that.
Anyway, I could go on and on, but I won't waste my words. Suffice to say this thread is utter nonsense.
I'm sorry, but if you believe climate change is a "hoax," you live under a rock.
We all know about climate change (use to be global warming). In most states it is called winter, spring, summer, fall. Anyone that does not believe in climate change must live in CA.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
